Marseille 2007
| Abstract #529 - Risk Compensation: Serosorting and Risk for HIV Transmission | ||||
|
Session: 18.2: Risk Perception (Parallel) on Monday @ 14.00-16.00 in CP Chaired by Elizabeth Brown, Yusef Azad Authors: Presenting Author: Ms Lisa Eaton - University of Connecticut, United States |
||||
| Additional Authors: | ||||
| Aim: Risk compensation is investigated by assessing the effects of serosortinglimiting ones sexual partners to those of the same HIV statuson sexual risk behavior. Serosorting has been identified as a method of preventing HIV transmission among men who have sex with men (MSM). Increases in risk behavior when perceived risk is lowered is referred to as risk compensation. | ||||
| Method / Issue: Potential participants were asked to complete a survey concerning same-sex relationships as they walked through the exhibit and display area of a large gay community festival located in Atlanta, GA, USA. Participants were offered $4 for completing the survey and were given the option of donating their incentive payment to a local AIDS service organization. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess differences between men who serosort and those who do not. Of primary interest were their beliefs about serosorting, perceptions of risk, and sexual risk behaviors. | ||||
| Results / Comments: Results from surveying 628 gay/bisexual men of HIV negative or HIV unknown status, demonstrated that a substantial number (229/36%) of men serosort. Men who serosort were more likely to believe that serosorting lowers the likelihood of HIV transmission and had more partners with whom they engaged in unprotected anal intercourse (UAI). Men who serosort were also more likely to have UAI during their last sexual encounter. Findings also demonstrated that roughly 89% of the sample gets an HIV test every six months or less. Additionally, around 25% of the sample has not had an HIV test in the last year. There were no differences between groups in terms of HIV testing history. | ||||
| Discussion: Based on the findings of the current study, participants who engaged in the HIV prevention strategy of serosorting were more likely to engage in high risk sexual behaviors than those participants who did not engage in serosorting. Those who believe in the protective benefits of serosorting are placing themselves at higher risk for HIV transmission than if they were to not rely on this strategy. Of particular concern is the lack of HIV testing. Serosorting is dependent on knowledge of one's HIV status, and given that HIV testing is infrequent, serosorting becomes quite risky. | ||||
| Go Back | ||||
